The Antecedents of Job Satisfaction amongst Academicians: An Empirical Evidence from a Malaysian Private University
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Job satisfaction has always been a prevalent area of interest around the globe. Generally, job satisfaction amongst academicians is inspired by several constructs which follow several theoretical assumptions. Many job satisfaction antecedents have been recommended based on the principles as stated by higher education institutions. This paper provides an extensive critical analysis whether the economic and environmental factors could influence the job satisfaction amongst academicians in a Malaysian private university. This antecedent is extensively investigated in literature and most of them are observed from the Western countries’ viewpoints. Despite the comprehensiveness of the empirical research on job satisfaction in the West, previous research investigating on job satisfaction antecedents in the Malaysian higher education institutions particularly in private universities remain scarce. As a result, this study provides empirical evidence from a Malaysian perspective on job satisfaction antecedents. The study surveys a sample of 198 respondents (99.0% usable response rate) which were duly completed and returned to the study. The findings showed relationships were significant among the constructs developed in assessing job satisfaction. The dimension of human resources policies is the most contributing factor. It could be concluded that the economic and environmental factors significantly influence the job satisfaction amongst academicians with several imperative constructs. The management of universities in Malaysia need to identify best practices that could provide maximum job satisfaction benefits to the academicians. This paper will contribute towards literature of job satisfaction, whereby lead to enhancing higher education institution performance in Malaysia, especially for private universities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".